[mike777]

http://physicsweb.or...es/news/11/4/14

[Al_U_Card]

So I guess that if I don't read your post, Mike, then it doesn't exist?

Now how can we apply this wonderful theory to the neocons???

[kenberg]

From the article:
"However, Alain Aspect, a physicist who performed the first Bell-type experiment in the 1980s, thinks the team's philosophical conclusions are subjective."

Could we even have a non-subjective conclusion that reality isn't real? Or that reality is more important than locality (is this like "Existence precedes essence"?)

There once was a time when I would read about advances in physics and believe that I at least had a glimmer of understanding. The strings and the quarks have left me behind.


From my early days:

To be is to do----Sartre
To do is to be----Camus
do be do be do----Sinatra

[helene_t]

Alain Aspect, on a physicist critical to the article, said:

There are other types of non-local models that are not addressed by either Leggett's inequalities or the experiment

Penrose gives a hint of one such non-local realistic model in his book "The emperor's new mind". As I understand it, he thinks that consciousness is related to the hidden variable. I'll try to apply that idea to Bell's experiment (this is my speculation, don't blame Penrose for any logical flaws in the following):

The reporter, on referring to a 1960s idea now carried out by the Austrian physicists, said:

Bell's trick, therefore, was to decide how to orient the polarizers only after the photons have left the source.

The decision on how to orient the polarizers is a physical phenomena itself. Any non-local hidden variable that governs the polarization of the photons may also affect the decision process.

[Al_U_Card]

The mind of man is a curious place
Despite its location behind the face
Proximity belies the sense of what is right
A vision of things related to second sight
To be aware and not to sleep is never any dream
Things are often just what they are and not just what they seem.